Chimp Challenge 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
As a member of one of the new teams , That's why I'm here.

It should be fun , and team 33 should be part of it , that's how I feel anyways.

I think all the teams want a fair , fun contest.

Surely 100,000 nerds can come up with a system to have fun with competition over imaginary rewards !!!

:D
 
BrainEater said:
As a member of one of the new teams , That's why I'm here.

It should be fun , and team 33 should be part of it , that's how I feel anyways.

I think all the teams want a fair , fun contest.

Surely 100,000 nerds can come up with a system to have fun with competition over imaginary rewards !!!

:D
Click to expand...

Not without 1/2 of them rage quitting.

Look, if you were not here to see it, just understand that it is a NO and leave it at that. There is nothing you can say, change the rules to, or promise kissy face. It wont happen.

If you were here when it went down I don't even need to say a thing.

That said, we are quite busy taking back out #1 spot.... a race we intend to win.
 
Last edited:
We appreciate your enthusiasm but it's just not going to happen with any sort of points race. It's got bad history here.
 
flogge said:
We appreciate your enthusiasm but it's just not going to happen with any sort of points race. It's got bad history here.
Click to expand...

I agree. Points is not the way.

Kendrak : I was'nt here for kissy face.I believe HWC is the best damn team on the planet.I'm looking for fair , unbiased confirmation.

Hehe...all BS aside , I think the top teams should come up with a way to have a fun competition , and promote the cause.Team 33 is part of that , lets talk about it.

:p
 
I have followed the CC for quite some time, in the early days the CC was a good clean fun thing for some teams to have a friendly competition between themselves. There was friendly bantering between teams and it pulled the folding teams and community together. There was no big list of rules that I remember, it was guided by honesty morality and ethics. ;)

Unfortunately over the years it changed, It became more about winning than it was about the spirit of competing and having fun. Rather than friendly bantering between teams there started to be accusations of cheating by other teams people bickering and accusing there own team members of slacking and not supporting there team etc. etc.etc. :(

The last few years it has turned into basically a immoral, unethical and completely dishonest competition I believe that just about every best practices policy set forth by Stanford was disregarded in the competition in the quest to win the competition. Hell during the CC last year the rules were changed 2 or 3 times so what good are the rules ?. IMHO the CC has turned into a bad joke and should be discontinued the only thing it promotes is bad folding behavior and hard feelings in the folding community. :eek:

I do not mean to be harsh about the CC but from this old timers point of view something really needs to change with it or it needs to be stopped. :rolleyes:
 
we should have a vote for the most sexy system race instead, people that want to try to win send there pics in and then to try to keep it unbiased someone posts all the pics in all the forums whit out saying what team said pc is form and then we vote on the pcs and pick the best one. that way we all get to see some cool boxes and show off our rigs to teh outside world a lite and mabay get some new blood in to folding. sounds better then a points race to me anyway
 
now that is a race we would win hands down, What with watercooled 4p rigs, a 2p HTPC, inumerable innovative cases/benches for housing such beasts and the sheer awesomeness of the quantity of 4p rigs that are available, job done, contest over
 
I am an OCN folder, so I can not speak towards the drama that apparently happened here a couple of years ago.
With that being said though, I won't be participating in this year's CC. The rig I fold on is a bigadv folder and changing username/passkey is a hassle with it. Also, many people don't switch over to the CC username and overtake, which pisses me off.
I would like for a system to be devised that doesn't involve changing of usernames.
Maybe then, H would participate. Don't shoot me down for this as I understand the old timers here have harsh feelings towards CC. I know that as a noob last CC I was taken aback by HWC's cheating.
 
If you did a username based contest it isnt a contest because by default any team is participating in points anyhow, regardless of if they say anything or not....
 
csm725 said:
I am an OCN folder, so I can not speak towards the drama that apparently happened here a couple of years ago.
With that being said though, I won't be participating in this year's CC. The rig I fold on is a bigadv folder and changing username/passkey is a hassle with it. Also, many people don't switch over to the CC username and overtake, which pisses me off.
I would like for a system to be devised that doesn't involve changing of usernames.
Maybe then, H would participate. Don't shoot me down for this as I understand the old timers here have harsh feelings towards CC. I know that as a noob last CC I was taken aback by HWC's cheating.
Click to expand...

And you are saying OCN followed all of the best practices. http://folding.stanford.edu/English/FAQ-BestPractices The only one I did not see evidence of being broken by OCN was #1. I do not mean to pick on OCN or anybody else but you should make sure there are no skeletons in your own closet before you accuse others. All of the teams cheated in one way or another last year. Whether it was a team that was doing it or individuals really does not matter. What matters is the fact that the winning and the means used to get there has become more important than the science.
 
Grandpa, not at all.
However your post is begging me to start the corehack debate, and I refuse to.
Priming WUs is publicly frowned upon in OCN. I've never seen it advocated...?
I do not believe corehack applies to #3 nor 4 or 5.
Sadly there are those that do bypass Rule 6.
Other than some people priming WUs (rules 2 and 6 I suppose), I didn't see anything bad from OCN's side...
And the primers were flamed sufficiently.
 
Let's just nip this in the bud.

This discussion isn't about what happened/who did what/mudslinging/etc...this thread will get closed in a hot second if it degenerates into that...hell I'd close it myself.

--------

Right now , Chimp Challenge 2012 does not exist . (no rules have been set) ... It's like we're starting a whole new contest.

It's obvious to all the teams that CC is broken and needs to be fixed , but I think there are solutions.Here's a couple ideas I'm batting around :

Want to eliminate 'priming' WU's ? : Make it a soft , un-announced start over a 2 day period.Problem solved.

Or how about this : If the purpose of the CC is to promote folding and bring new members into our respective teams , make it a users race : Most new clients over a 3 month period wins.

There's lotsa different ideas.

-------
 
Umm....

Can you guys talk about this on a team forum that will be participating in the CC?
 
Sure , thanks for listening as far as you have , I know it's been a touchy issue here.

I've done my part in making you aware of the current status , and inviting your input.

I'll put y'all down as a no......If anything interesting comes up , I'll tell someone here.

-------

Fold on !

:D
 
Because some teams have a financial incentive monthly and printed in certain product boxes advertising the fact, and so they gain members at a much higher rate than any other team ... in short it would be a bunch of community teams vs a corporate team...

BrainEater said:
Why ?

Over a 3 month period or so , any users (really I mean clients) gained would reflect a positive gain towards the goal of the CC , and folding in general.
Click to expand...
 
csm725 said:
I quite enjoy the idea of a surprise start...
Click to expand...

I like it too.

OTOH, I fold when I can on what machines I have available regardless. And TBH, all persons/teams involved have gotten a bit nutso with points versus science. Otherwise Stanford wouldn't see a need to lockout Bigadv. And we wouldn't see the proliferation of 4p rigs of late...despite Stanford being kinda "meh" towards people dumping money into personal dedicated folding rigs.

Instead of points, # of WUs completed maybe? That is a fairly easy stat to track...would be interesting to see the distribution of WUs completed SMP vs. GPU vs. Bigadv vs. HugeAdv, but I have no clue how that could be reliably and kept track of with honesty.

That is how it seems from this crotchety ex-OCN folder turned [H] folder. 'Course I have no clue what the drama was that turned 33 away from CC.
 
That again would be unfair, certain teams are composed of tons of GPU folders, which put out more units on a daily basis....


Skripka said:
I like it too.

OTOH, I fold when I can on what machines I have available regardless. And TBH, all persons/teams involved have gotten a bit nutso with points versus science. Otherwise Stanford wouldn't see a need to lockout Bigadv. And we wouldn't see the proliferation of 4p rigs of late...despite Stanford being kinda "meh" towards people dumping money into personal dedicated folding rigs.

Instead of points, # of WUs completed maybe? That is a fairly easy stat to track...would be interesting to see the distribution of WUs completed SMP vs. GPU vs. Bigadv vs. HugeAdv, but I have no clue how that could be reliably and kept track of with honesty.

That is how it seems from this crotchety ex-OCN folder turned [H] folder. 'Course I have no clue what the drama was that turned 33 away from CC.
Click to expand...
 
W.Feather said:
That again would be unfair, certain teams are composed of tons of GPU folders, which put out more units on a daily basis....
Click to expand...

Which would be the reason for wanting to try to categorize WUs. Gives everyone a bite at a category, i.e. getting recognition in an SMP WUs category say. Presuming one could keep track of what type of WUs were completed among all the other WUs completed by a given team.

Idle thoughts/ideas on a Sunday afternoon.
 
AFAIK EoC or other tracking sites have no way of saying which is GPU and which are CPU ...

Skripka said:
Which would be the reason for wanting to try to categorize WUs. Gives everyone a bite at a category, i.e. getting recognition in an SMP WUs category say. Presuming one could keep track of what type of WUs were completed among all the other WUs completed by a given team.

Idle thoughts/ideas on a Sunday afternoon.
Click to expand...
 
W.Feather said:
AFAIK EoC or other tracking sites have no way of saying which is GPU and which are CPU ...
Click to expand...

True.

Tho Stanford themselves have to keep track of username, passkey, and WU (R,C,G) at least update by update. I mean "have to" in the "how can they not" sense of "have to" to generate the points stats....not in the "factual statement" sense of "have to". If the big teams were interested and captains nicely asked Stanford, they might be willing track those stats I'd hazard a guess... Who knowsthey might already track the WU typs stats by team/individual, and simply keep the numbers internally to monitor what people are doing and how to better incentive-ize the points system.
 
Grandpa_01 said:
I have followed the CC for quite some time, in the early days the CC was a good clean fun thing for some teams to have a friendly competition between themselves. There was friendly bantering between teams and it pulled the folding teams and community together. There was no big list of rules that I remember, it was guided by honesty morality and ethics. ;)

Unfortunately over the years it changed, It became more about winning than it was about the spirit of competing and having fun. Rather than friendly bantering between teams there started to be accusations of cheating by other teams people bickering and accusing there own team members of slacking and not supporting there team etc. etc.etc. :(

The last few years it has turned into basically a immoral, unethical and completely dishonest competition I believe that just about every best practices policy set forth by Stanford was disregarded in the competition in the quest to win the competition. Hell during the CC last year the rules were changed 2 or 3 times so what good are the rules ?. IMHO the CC has turned into a bad joke and should be discontinued the only thing it promotes is bad folding behavior and hard feelings in the folding community. :eek:

I do not mean to be harsh about the CC but from this old timers point of view something really needs to change with it or it needs to be stopped. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

thats a pretty good summary of things actually

I say if you want to do a chimp challenge allow only regular uniproc CPU/SMP CPU units or something... the whole bigadv bigsuperadvance bigholyfuckingshitadv etc had made it too complicated to switch names anyway

that being said I could not see us participating as a team in another CC ever again, I can't speak for the team, and really, not even myself since my output is hovering between nil and sad, but I don't think we need that drama ever again here, don't think we have ever 100% recovered to be honest
 
Let me first say that I totally understand the frustration regarding what happened in the past, and your reluctance towards CC because of this.
My point was, I think that's also the point for others, that we can come up with a good set of rules that is fair, easy to implement, and non-frictional-for-teams. (I know we didn't need rules in the past, but we also didn't need democracy circa 3000BC, so get over it ;). Every good competition needs good set of rules.)

My understanding here is that what caused the problem here is the fact that people had to change their folding IDs to actually participate. When some team members don't.... I believe this is a source of friction for all teams that's participating, and I say, why don't we get rid of it?? Why do we need to have yet another level of teaming-up, when we already have our teams to compete??

Another source of friction (this time, between teams) is the bigadv and along with it, timing issues. To be honest, as long as CC is a points-based competition, I don't see how we get rid of that. Some people will do the priming. HOWEVER, we can give less reasons to do so by making CC longer. Last year, CC lasted 10 days (before that it was even shorter for the winning team). That is just too short (too transient) and it encourages priming. Think of a 30-day marathon, the effect of that initial sprint goes to practically zero (literally, compare a 100m race to a 10K).

At the end, it's up to you to join or not, but it would be nice if you did. :)
 
definitely good idea's Gryphon and would definitely help the CC.. i always thought the switching name thing was stupid and caused to many issues, especially with the passkey requirement needed now. the 30 day idea works well too. other then last year all the CC's pretty much ended in 3-4 days. it worked back when we only had uniprocessor since the points were consistent but that concept doesn't work anymore so the 30 day idea fixes that.

if you can get those ideas implemented into the CC i think you might actually be able to change peoples minds here.
 
theGryphon said:
Let me first say that I totally understand the frustration regarding what happened in the past, and your reluctance towards CC because of this.
My point was, I think that's also the point for others, that we can come up with a good set of rules that is fair, easy to implement, and non-frictional-for-teams. (I know we didn't need rules in the past, but we also didn't need democracy circa 3000BC, so get over it ;). Every good competition needs good set of rules.)

My understanding here is that what caused the problem here is the fact that people had to change their folding IDs to actually participate. When some team members don't.... I believe this is a source of friction for all teams that's participating, and I say, why don't we get rid of it?? Why do we need to have yet another level of teaming-up, when we already have our teams to compete??

Another source of friction (this time, between teams) is the bigadv and along with it, timing issues. To be honest, as long as CC is a points-based competition, I don't see how we get rid of that. Some people will do the priming. HOWEVER, we can give less reasons to do so by making CC longer. Last year, CC lasted 10 days (before that it was even shorter for the winning team). That is just too short (too transient) and it encourages priming. Think of a 30-day marathon, the effect of that initial sprint goes to practically zero (literally, compare a 100m race to a 10K).

At the end, it's up to you to join or not, but it would be nice if you did. :)
Click to expand...

Unless you factor out the points-system somehow. Because as it stands the points system is downright screwy right now. You're going to end up up with grumpy peoples. With hugeadv, bigadv, and especially HPCS other forms of folding are for points purposes irrelevant...especially given the increasingly pitiful PPD of even smp compared to the same machine running the less-than-ethical corehack.

It would be nice to have simple rules with minimum chance for circumvention, that don't automatically mean one team wins. Especially given that in raw PPD it is EVGA, [H], OCN and then everyone else.
 
Skripka said:
Unless you factor out the points-system somehow. Because as it stands the points system is downright screwy right now. You're going to end up up with grumpy peoples. With hugeadv, bigadv, and especially HPCS other forms of folding are for points purposes irrelevant...especially given the increasingly pitiful PPD of even smp compared to the same machine running the less-than-ethical corehack.

It would be nice to have simple rules with minimum chance for circumvention, that don't automatically mean one team wins. Especially given that in raw PPD it is EVGA, [H], OCN and then everyone else.
Click to expand...

theres really nothing you can do with the current point system though(even though its a total joke to begin with).. you can't differentiate points from GPU, points from SMP, points from bigadv.. as far as the corehack goes i doubt there are all that many people doing it anyways. it was the same way with the x6's when we figured out how to get the x6's to do bigadv.. out of all the people i think maybe 10 or so actually did it, a few here and a few on OCN and probably a couple on evga even though they wouldn't admit to it.

and its always been a contest geared more toward the heavy hitter teams anyways so its not really changing anything. but in the end it was never about who won or lost, it was always about getting more people into folding which it did until evga got involved and then the whole friendly part of it disappeared since no one wanted to lose to a pay to win/fold team.
 
Last edited:
Still it would be a good idea for [H] to be in on the discussions - even if you are not part of the CC this year.

this way we have an outsider(previous member) that left giving their two cents
maybe get a perspective from a team that feels like they are cheated/wronged/etc by the others

as a CC rep from EVGA ...Id like you guys to get back in.

The rules have to be made fair...if they aren't EVGA may leave as well
we lost last year - that's fine - we ate it

we wouldn't have minded so much if the rules were fairer
it just stunk last year...most PPD and nearly last

It's kind hard to fight against being outnumbered by smaller teams
we need you guys at least consider it...
contact Zodac at OCN if you want to be in on the discussions
 
Not sure if you are all aware but max pc is not joining the CC this year either
 
Xavier, it wont happen, it is bad mojo around these here parts to be in the CC, for reasons that have been stated, there wont be a way to make it fair for all teams...
 
W.Feather said:
Xavier, it wont happen, it is bad mojo around these here parts to be in the CC, for reasons that have been stated, there wont be a way to make it fair for all teams...
Click to expand...

Seems that way.

'Sides I IRC'd with Z this morning, and unless there is an [H] team in CC there doesn't seem to be much to talk about or discuss regarding CC. OTOH, there's probably no chance of getting an [H] team together in CC unless we're in the discussion. Ends up being a chicken and the egg.
 
Nathan_P said:
Not sure if you are all aware but max pc is not joining the CC this year either
Click to expand...

That's not the case

they haven't step out on it yet and are in on developing the CC rules
Full Taoer said they are currently in (tentative)

As for Zodac not allowing you in.... we'll see?
Im already fighting for spots in the forum for ya

Ya can't say people at EVGA aren't at least trying to get along with ya.
It should be a neighborly/friendly competition...not knives in the back deal
 
Xavier Zepherious said:
That's not the case

they haven't step out on it yet and are in on developing the CC rules
Full Taoer said they are currently in (tentative)

As for Zodac not allowing you in.... we'll see?
Im already fighting for spots in the forum for ya

Ya can't say people at EVGA aren't at least trying to get along with ya.
It should be a neighborly/friendly competition...not knives in the back deal
Click to expand...

Things have changed since this post was made then, http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7087719&postcount=73

It should be a fun competition but the point is it is a competition, one that brings out all the nasty parts of a personality as evidenced on this team back in 09. I wasn't here then but i can see that it still is a very sore subject amongst those that were here.
 
that is up to you team/forum - no one should force you

I'll live with that...but that doesn't preclude your from helping out in the rules development - and maybe making it fair - so that in later years you are in

if your wish is to stay out that's fine -
but the intended purpose of the CC suppose to be a friendly competition
to bring other teams in - to advance PR about folding -and to bring in new members, new teams,to increase overall awareness and production for F@H (stanford)

this is about finding cures and promoting science isn't it?

We want more teams in it - like at least the top 20-30

IF EVGA loses fairly - we aren't gonna go out and whine about it...that's life - sometimes your win sometimes you lose.
you can't be on the top of the heap all the time.

the last thing we want is bad blood/regrets between teams
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top